Author
Topic: Dealing with a spotlight hog (Read 13326 times)

I agree that your mother should speak to someone at the state level. If she doesn't, she is implicated in these shenanigans (please note, I don't necessarily mean legally implicated, although that may be the case as well). If I heard that something like this was going on, I'd assume a member of staff who knew and did nothing was part of the problem.

I think having a quiet word off the record to start with is a good idea. Of course, if the first thought of the state level people is also 'cover up, cover up', there's a bigger problem. As a PP says, it isn't the problem that usually brings someone down, it's the cover up.

Your mother appears to have at least a semi-public role in regard to other organisations. Is apparently colluding with something like this what she wants her reputation with those organisations to be based on?

Also, just because I'm curious, what 'resources' is ProblemPerson talking about? If she's a Vanderbilt and single handedly funding the organisation, I suppose I can see why people are letting her get away with so much.

Your mom has two options.1) report the issues to the State level and give them the opportunity to manage and control the fall out of the woman's actions. 2) keep knuckling under to this woman's threats and allow the State level to be blind sided when someone complains outside the organization and the State level has to go into reactive damage control.

There are good reasons organizations put in term limits and this woman is demonstrating a very strong case for them. Just because she gets good results for the organization doesn't mean some one else wouldn't be as or more effective.

Tiamet, I can't really say what the resources are without giving away what the cause is. I hope you can forgive me for that.

My mother has read this thread and is coming around to the fact that she's going to have to be a whistle blower. She likes the idea of bean dipping and redirecting the conversation to "the cause" if the issue of the spotlight comes up. Ironically, my mother doesn't give a rodent's behind about the spotlight. She's quite happy working behind the scenes. Group 3 has put her in a more visible role recently and while she doesn't refuse the role, she would have been perfectly happy without it. She's the kind of person who likes to do her work and then sit in the wings and watch. Thank you everybody for your input.

Logged

Some people lift weights. I lift measures. It's a far more esoteric workout. - (Quoted from a personal friend)

Tiamet, I can't really say what the resources are without giving away what the cause is. I hope you can forgive me for that.

My mother has read this thread and is coming around to the fact that she's going to have to be a whistle blower. She likes the idea of bean dipping and redirecting the conversation to "the cause" if the issue of the spotlight comes up. Ironically, my mother doesn't give a rodent's behind about the spotlight. She's quite happy working behind the scenes. Group 3 has put her in a more visible role recently and while she doesn't refuse the role, she would have been perfectly happy without it. She's the kind of person who likes to do her work and then sit in the wings and watch. Thank you everybody for your input.

Fair enough - whatever it is, it appears from the details that you have given that there is some public exposure. Also, any cause that requires lobbyists generally has people on the other side which (depending on how nasty they may get), means a representative has to be seen to be squeaky clean (not just be that way as I'm sure your mother is) as anything else will be used against them by their opponents.

I'm glad your mother is intending to report this person - I think it does sound necessary, sadly. I hope she'll be able to do so without any comeback on her.

One thing I have learnt from working with voluntary groups is that politicians and those who have influence, run a mile when ever there is any hint of impropriety.

In other words all your mothers's and the rest of the group's hard work can be lost by this Lady not sticking to the rules.

We had an example where a local branch of a large National Advocacy group did something foolish 15 odd years ago. My Mother, who is not a person to bear a grudge, still mentions this whenever she encounters them fundraising. Mud sticks, and foolish mud seems to stick longer.

My experience has been that someone who rides roughshod over the rules, alienates volunteers enough to make them quit and indulges in financial irregularities does not do the organization any good over the long run.

You know she is lying about your mother and how she is "stealing the spotlight." What's to keep her from lying about her resources and abilities? While this woman may be getting some things done, it is possible that a different leader could accomplish more or do better.

When organizations I've belonged to finally oust people like this, two things are discovered. One, no one is irreplaceable. Two, the organization, after a short period of getting used to the new way things are being done, becomes better and stronger.

My experience has been that someone who rides roughshod over the rules, alienates volunteers enough to make them quit and indulges in financial irregularities does not do the organization any good over the long run.

My experience is someone like this has Narcissistic Traits. It can be quite difficult to get them removed but you have to have many people that adhere to the rules to do it. Narcissists crave the spotlight...they get their "supply" of attention from it. Oh, and rules don't apply to them! And they would be happy to cause havoc because they get attention from that too. Good attention or bad they still need the attention.

In your mother's place, I would talk to the other officers and convince them that it is better for them to lose this woman's resource than to lose their reputation, their charter and possibly face legal consequences. With their support, I would formally ask for the woman's resignation, citing the charter. If the officers present a united front on this, she will have very few options other than leaving.

Second, I would get a very good accountant and a lawyer to sort the legal mess. Make a full report to the state chapter, outlining the situation, complications and how you mean to move forward to solve this.

The other option is for your mom and the other folks to simply decide that her "I'll take my ball and go home" threats are the SMALLER risk and to vote her out.

They can--there's absolutely no reason why they can't. Oh, if they don't want to confront her, they might need to wait for the next election and then claim "new blood for the good of the organization, to give other volunteers much needed leadership experience." And "giving her a much needed break."

She might end up hanging around, with her resources and everything, just because she'd lose so much face if she waltzed off in a snit.

My experience has been that someone who rides roughshod over the rules, alienates volunteers enough to make them quit and indulges in financial irregularities does not do the organization any good over the long run.

You know she is lying about your mother and how she is "stealing the spotlight." What's to keep her from lying about her resources and abilities? While this woman may be getting some things done, it is possible that a different leader could accomplish more or do better.

When organizations I've belonged to finally oust people like this, two things are discovered. One, no one is irreplaceable. Two, the organization, after a short period of getting used to the new way things are being done, becomes better and stronger.

My co-op president is a bit like this--she has alienated a lot of us or discouraged us from stepping up to do more. We *can't* ask her to 'resign' (well we could ask her to resign as president, but she'll still be a resident), and there's a lot we don't do simply because it means dealing with her.

And, she likes to brag to us about how she saves us money by bargaining so hard, but I know of three specific instances in which she specifically, personally, has either cost us money or has driven away a contractor who would accomplish a tough job or give us a decent price. I oversaw a $2,200 electrical job that I originally had a bid for $800 on--the first electrician told me he didn't want it after all because she was nickel-and-diming us to death.

A friend of ours who did marble work stopped working for the building because he *wanted* to charge the co-op a "PITA" cost but knew it would backfire in the neighborhood. So he just won't work for us because he doesn't want to deal with her.

So she thinks she's so great--and don't get me wrong, she does a lot, tons more than she should have to--but she doesn't see (and so won't report) the ways she COSTS us. Financial and in terms of other people's not being willing to step up to the plate.

In our case, it *would* be true that our organization really needs other people to be willing to lead. And we could really benefit from the expansion of expertise, and from simply having a break from her. And she does deserve a break. But nobody wants to do it because they don't want to continue to deal with her as a building resident. And we also don't believe she's really willing to step down.